Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Reorte]

2 hours ago, MJI said:

Even RTAs are included!!!!

I've seen somewhere that they aren't, but even if they are there won't be anywhere near enough of them to make a significant difference to the overall numbers.

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, MJI said:

Even RTAs are included!!!!

Probably had a coughing fit while driving…..

[durham light infantry]

13 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

Probably had a coughing fit while driving…..

 

Not funny.

 

I have permanent scarring on both lungs caused by Covid, and consequenty a debilitating cough that sounds like a 40 per day smoker.

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, durham light infantry said:

 

Not funny.

 

I have permanent scarring on both lungs caused by Covid, and consequenty a debilitating cough that sounds like a 40 per day smoker.

Sorry to hear that, we lost a close family member due to Covid last year during the second lockdown, it’s a nasty disease but we mustn’t let it get us too far down.

[Nearholmer]

I noticed today that today a couple of ‘papers are quoting a nameless ‘government adviser’ as saying that it is likely to be necessary to reintroduce masking requirements, and have an extended school half-term holiday in October, to prevent Covid hospital cases getting beyond NHS capacity.

 

Sounds very plausible to me, and I wonder if it is deliberate leaking in ‘wicket-rolling’ mode.

 

The chances of catching it are currently quite high. I calculate that the average probability of catching it within the next year, if rates stay as they are now, is about 1:5, although ‘average’ in this context is a bit meaningless, because near-hermits and mega-socialites will clearly have very different probabilities.

 

If a person does catch it, the risk of needing hospital treatment seems to be about 1:40, and the risk of dying about 1:300, although again these are average figures and in reality a great deal will, I’m sure, depend upon degree of ‘vulnerability by age or other reasons’.

 

I don’t think it’s a dominating risk in our lives, though, when compared with things like heart disease. My doc assessed my heart risk: as a reasonably fit and clean-living early-60s with all stats in the green zone, I still have a 13% of a ‘cardiac event’ of some sort in the next 12 months, apparently.

[John M Upton]

Any attempt to reimpose masks or any kind of lockdown now is going to be futile.  For many now Covid has become yesterdays chip wrapper and they don't care anymore.

 

Sets them up for a huge wake up call though...

 

The fact that the Government have denied there are any such plans means there is...

[Hobby]

Different use of the word "plan" I expect. There will be plans in place to roll out if they need to, but no plans currently to introduce them!! 

[Nearholmer]

The way it’s reported in The Guardian (cue outbreak of foaming disgust from the right) looks pretty convincing and sensible to me, with ‘government spokesperson’ not ruling out even a firebreak lockdown if necessary, talking about having contingency plans, but saying that no lockdown is currently planned for half-term.

 

My fear is that it will all end-up as a mini-repeat of last year, where the unpopularity of doing anything weighs so heavily that when any action is taken, it’s taken very late, and therefore has to be severe and prolonged in order to do anything useful, whereas a stitch in time would save nine.

TBH, I still don’t quite understand why the simple, low-cost mitigation of widespread mask-wearing was so easily given-up-on by HMG …… maybe they thought the ‘burn rate’ would be OK without it, maybe they were daft enough to think that most people would act cautiously (most don’t unless heavily prompted).

[woodenhead]

I imagine it is this that HMG are watching, not the infections.  

 

The fly in the ointment may be the Mu variant which there is concern is vaccine resistant.

 

Zero deaths from Covid isn't achievable, but a low level mortality rate is whilst not desirable is palatable for a reasonable level of normal social contact.

[Nearholmer]

I don’t think that’s the graph to watch, it’s this one:

 

It’s people being hospitalised by Covid that is the problem, because if the numbers continue to climb, or even plateau for a long period, the ability of hospitals to cope with patients with flu, and all the other winter illnesses, will be severely compromised.
 

It could all become very like the winter just gone in hospitals, because of the combination of Covid and everything else unless things slow-down naturally, or are capped by the return of some mitigations.

 

A hundred, or even two hundred, Covid deaths each day is something people will stomach if it happens in a context of hospitals being able to admit the sick, but people get really anxious/annoyed/voluble when things get to  the stage of eight hour waits for an ambulance, people dying on trolleys in corridors etc, so HMG will do the necessary to avoid that.

 

I’m sure that enough is now know about the detail of how the bug spreads, and who is at greatest risk, for very targeted measures, well short of lockdown, to be used. ‘Stay at home’ orders for >60yo? Hefty pressure to vaccinate youngsters? Actually get serious about masks? Shut night-clubs and restrict pubs in some way? 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Neil]

2 hours ago, John M Upton said:

Any attempt to reimpose masks or any kind of lockdown now is going to be futile.  .....

 

Face coverings still required here in Wales in many indoor settings; no rowing back by the Welsh Assembly required. I'm still unsure why this was ditched in England as it has no discernable economic cost and the physical necessity to mask up serves as a reminder that Covid is still present and to take care when out and about.

 

45 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

.... It’s people being hospitalised by Covid that is the problem, because if the numbers continue to climb, or even plateau for a long period, the ability of hospitals to cope with patients with flu, and all the other winter illnesses, will be severely compromised. ....

 

 

Not just the usual round of winter illnesses but also the ability to catch up on the backlog caused by Covid in the first place.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Neil

[RJS1977]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

TBH, I still don’t quite understand why the simple, low-cost mitigation of widespread mask-wearing was so easily given-up-on by HMG …… maybe they thought the ‘burn rate’ would be OK without it, maybe they were daft enough to think that most people would act cautiously (most don’t unless heavily prompted).

 

Compulsory mask-wearing is a blunt instrument. Whilst there are definitely places where I would agree with mask-wearing, there are also many places where it should never really have been needed in the first place. A lot will depend on location, venue, and time of day. Zone 1 in the rush hour is much different to the Chesham branch off-peak, for example.

 

It seems to be a common misconception that there are people who can wear masks all day, and those who have some medical issue that prevents them from wearing them, and nothing in between. In reality, it's probably much more of a spectrum with some being able to manage them for longer than others. Personally, whilst not falling into the exemption category, I struggle to wear one for much more than 45 minutes - 1 hour (sometimes less) depending on factors such as temperature, humidity etc, although I can wear a face shield almost indefinitely.

 

So for me, as a non-driver, I found the compulsory mask-wearing was limiting the distance I could travel, and frustrating when I could see buses and trains virtually empty. It's only been since July 19th that I've really been able to travel with a degree of freedom with regards to destination - albeit with a degree of care to avoid busy places as I'm fully aware the virus hasn't gone away - and as expected, most of the trains and buses I've been on have been next to empty. As such, I regard the possibility of reimposition of a blanket mask mandate with a considerable amount of trepidation, although I appreciate others will have the opposite view.

 

To my mind, the ideal would have been for the rule to be "Masks must be worn when instructed by a member of railway staff", with the train guard/conductor keeping an eye on passenger numbers and announcing "Ladies and Gentlemen, the train is now starting to fill up. You must now wear a mask unless exempt" when the train is busy. 

 

Edit - or alternatively, have "masked" and "unmasked" carriages like there used to be for smokers and non-smokers.

 

Similarly it really needs to be up to venues to decide what their mask policy should be, as they know their venues better than anyone else. I can understand a cramped venue like Pendon having mask-wearing as a requirement, on the other hand, big venues like the NRM, Brooklands etc have plenty of space to distance and for anything nasty to disperse. One of my first 'trips out' was to Oxford Bus Museum, and I contacted them in advance to enquire what their policy was. Their reply was that when they started marking the floor out for social distancing earlier in the pandemic, they quickly realised that their (relatively low number of) visitors were normally well over 2m apart anyway!

 

To my mind, the big drivers of the increases in cases haven't been from public transport, but from big events like the Euros, Boardmasters, Reading and Leeds Festivals etc.

Edited September 7, 2021 by RJS1977

[APOLLO]

Can we as a nation afford another lockdown ?. I think not after todays announcements.

 

Went to the Trafford Centre at Manchester today (Big shopping centre). As kids are back at school not too many there. Quite a few empty shops which is a sign of the times. Hardly anybody wearing masks, just a few older folks. I wore mine on and off - on if a shop was busy (very few).

 

Biggest risk were the pillocks in white vans etc one yard behind, flashing their lights on the M60 / M61.

 

Lovely weather, just had a BBQ !!!

 

Brit15

[Nearholmer]

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

although I can wear a face shield almost indefinitely.

Unfortunately, they do very little indeed to protect the wearer, or to prevent an infected wearer from infecting others. My mother uses one, and I’ve not had the heart to tell her that tests have proven them to be of very limited value.

 

But, wearing a mask for a prolonged period is definitely not fun. The longest I’ve worn one was c2hrs on the one train trip I’ve made in 20 months, and that certainly made me sympathise with people who have to wear them at work all day.

 

If the big events have been the big drivers, perhaps HMG should publish some stats to show that ….. or whatever else the stats show, because at the moment we are all whistling in the dark for want of solid facts.

 

Big events make big headlines - “Thousands catch Covid at XYZ!!!”- but, what about the rest of the c30k cases each day? It’s a bit hard to believe that they are all secondary or tertiary to the big events, and even if they are it implies that it is spreading effectively outside of the big occasions. Is it spreading mainly within homes, trains, shops, gyms, restaurants, whelk-stalls?? Assuming the facts are knowable, then it would be useful for us all to know them, and it might garner understanding if restrictions

 

(I’ll put Oxford Bus Museum on my day out list - I didn’t even know there was such a place!)

 

 

[Hobby]

It depends on the type of mask, some are effective or hospitals wouldn't still insist on people wearing them.

 

 

I love rjs's confidence that we train guards could actually police mask wearing... I'll give you a clue... We can't!!! 

[Nearholmer]

It’s face shields, rather than masks, that I’m saying are of very limited benefit.

 

If everyone wears even a fairly pathetic single-thickness mask it is surprisingly effective, and if everyone wears a three-layer not-very-fancy one the effect is very good indeed. But, the real key is “everyone”; 

 

My reading of mask enforcement on trains is that nobody in charge thought it was important enough to merit firm enforcement, so they didn’t put any resources into it; they relied on good will and good sense, neither of which is anything like universal.

If those in charge had decided it was highly important, a hefty crack-down on it, with people being arrested and banged-up for non-compliance, would have worked wonders. Even the sort of drip-drip-drip reminders that some shops have operated, typically by posting a security guard with that as their prime focus, would have gone a long way. But, clearly nobody thought it merited a couple of security guards on each train to do that.

 

So, either it was never all that important, and the wishy-washy approach taken was about right; or, it was desperately important, and those in charge, from HMG to train company managers, have been negligent. TBH, I have no idea which of those is truest.

 

 

 

[andyman7]

1 minute ago, Nearholmer said:

If those in charge had decided it was highly important, a hefty crack-down on it, with people being arrested and banged-up for non-compliance, would have worked wonders. Even the sort of drip-drip-drip reminders that some shops have operated, typically by posting a security guard with that as their prime focus, would have gone a long way. But, clearly nobody thought it merited a couple of security guards on each train to do that.

'A couple of security guards on each train' is a completely unfeasible proposition - you would be talking of hundreds of people that simply do not exist now. So the question is academic

[Nearholmer]

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Can we as a nation afford another lockdown ?.

Can we as a nation let Covid spread to a degree that causes our hospitals to collapse under the load it creates?

 

The answer to both is probably: no.

 

Which is why my guess is that we won’t get a full-blown lockdown again, but might well get carefully, hopefully intelligently, targeted measures, if the tide doesn’t turn as a result of widespread vaccination.

[Nearholmer]

20 minutes ago, andyman7 said:

A couple of security guards on each train' is a completely unfeasible proposition - you would be talking of hundreds of people that simply do not exist now. So the question is academic

No, it’s not ‘completely unfeasible’ …. If it was important enough, it could and would have been done. The money and people would have been found - there have been hundreds of thousands of people on furlough who could have been conscripted if the situation merited it. Or, “footballer wages” could have been offered for the job, with a bounty paid for every person kicked-off the railway for non-compliance.

 

My point is that it clearly wasn’t considered that important. Which is either fine, or negligent, and I know not which.

 

Its the same with picking fruit and veg. Much hand-wringing about shortage of labour in the U.K. at some stages, but no conscription. Those in charge didn’t think it was that important.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I’m not saying that conscription should have been applied in either case, merely noticing that it wasn’t, and concluding that these things weren’t considered that important.

 

People do get conscripted to fight in wars, and occasionally for other jobs of national importance (coal mining in Britain, and digging turf in Ireland, both in the 1940s, spring to mind), because those in charge decide that those things are desperately important.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Jonboy]

Round here even the stations with security guards can’t enforce the no smoking on the platforms rules, how would they been able to enforce mask wearing, with the possible exception of holding up every train until the unmasked left the vehicle with the various consequences that entails.

[Rivercider]

50 minutes ago, andyman7 said:

'A couple of security guards on each train' is a completely unfeasible proposition - you would be talking of hundreds of people that simply do not exist now. So the question is academic

At the supermarket where I work there has been a problem for several years now to cover the security guard shifts.

I think they are paid less per hour now than they were 10 years ago, which might have something to do with it.

 

cheers

[Nearholmer]

8 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

with the possible exception of holding up every train until the unmasked left the vehicle with the various consequences that entails

It’s about scales of importance.

What you are implicitly saying is that it’s worth running the risk of people spreading Covid on trains, if doing that makes sure the trains run on time.

 

That may be a sensible balance to strike. It certainly seems to be the one accepted by those in charge. Or, it may not be a sensible balance.

 

As a rather daft thought experiment: imagine that a passenger has deliberately let loose a deadly tarantula in a crowded train carriage, and is wearing a huge day-glo orange badge telling everyone they’ve done so. Should the train be allowed to proceed, because making sure the trains run on time is more important than the off-chance that the spider will actually bite someone, or should something different happen?

 

Extend that, and imagine that about half the passengers on the train are wearing  ‘I let a tarantula loose’ badges, and that maybe ten percent of them really have. Now what?

 

And, at what point is there a crack-down on tarantula loosers, with them getting arrested for causing risk and disruption to everyone else?

[Not Jeremy]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

 

 

And, at what point is there a crack-down on tarantula loosers, with them getting arrested for causing risk and disruption to everyone else?

 

Is it perhaps time for your medication now?

[monkeysarefun]

15 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

If a person does catch it, the risk of needing hospital treatment seems to be about 1:40,

 

 

Here we've only got the Delta variant and our hospitalisation rate is a bit over 1  in 10, at about 11%. Many  are in the  30 to 60 year age group so its not just the frail and long of tooth.

 

  Current strict lockdowns and mask wearing inside and outside is keeping our daily infection rate bouncing around between 1300 to 1500, meaning 130 to 150 extra hospitalisations a day, 

 

Without the mask wearing and lockdowns, our hospitals would be getting swamped about now. 

 

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/more-than-one-in-10-people-in-nsw-with-covid-now-end-up-in-hospital-20210905-p58oyv.html

Edited September 8, 2021 by monkeysarefun

[monkeysarefun]

7 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Should the train be allowed to proceed, because making sure the trains run on time is more important than the off-chance that the spider will actually bite someone, or should something different happen?

 

 

 

Massive spider claims six seats for itself on busy Melbourne train

 

 

A sizeable spider travelled in style on a busy Melbourne train on Friday morning, claiming enough space to stretch out across six seats.

The spider successfully annexed a set of four seats on the crowded peak-hour service, as well as two seats in the row behind that it might have been eyeing off for the extra legroom.

 

 

The spider is understood to be on the seat by the window in the above photo and therefore cannot be seen.

 

Native wildlife is protected here, but not normally to this extent.

Edited September 8, 2021 by monkeysarefun